--- On Mon, 9/19/11, Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> wrote: ... > 2011/9/19 Jürgen Schmidt <jogischm...@googlemail.com>: ... > > > > do you mean to check in the files under ext_source > into svn and remove it > > later on when we have cleaned up the code. Or do you > mean to put it > > somehwere on apache extras? > > I would prefer to save these binary files under apache > extra if possible. > > > > > Why not just keep in in SVN? Moving things > to Apache-Extras does not > help us with the IP review. In other > words, if we have a dependency > on a OSS module that has an incompatible license, then > moving that > module to Apache Extras does not make that dependency go > away. We > still need to understand the nature of the dependency: a > build tool, a > dynamic runtime dependency, a statically linked library, an > optional > extensions, a necessary core module. >
But adding in stuff that we have to remove immediately (nss, seamonkey, .. ) doesn't help either. I also think a lot of that stuff has to be updated before brought in: ICU apparently would be trouble, but the Apache-commons, ICC, and other stuff can/should be updated. <snip> >> a) Track this in SVN properties. So set ip:sga > for the SGA files, > >> ip:mit for files that are MIT licensed, etc. I thought we had delayed updating the copyrights in the header to ease the CWS integration. I still hope to see more of those, especially anything related to gnumake (I don't know when, but dmake has to go!). Using the SVN properties is a good idea. And we do have to start the NOTICES file. All just IMHO, of course. Pedro.
